if the leaks are real, it's highly embarrassing for us intelligence. we will ask the journalist glenn greenwald whether we should be worried by the cia's ability to hack, or by its inability to keep its own secrets. and, they're at it again. defeat for the prime minister in the lords. they want parliament to vote on the final brexit deal. does that make sense, or screw up the negotiation? gina miller and theresa villiers will tell us. the day before the budget, we're inside cumbria county council to see how austerity is playing out. are theyjust about managing? we can't go on like this. i don't think we can — we can continue like this, as councils, up and down the country. and viewsnight looks on the bright side of life. now, imagine we were to treat people the way most of us really are. pretty nice. creative. and more than willing to contribute to the common good. hello.
we've had the chelsea manning leaks, then came edward snowdon, and today another huge wikileaks data dump — they're calling it vault 7, and they say it's from a division at the heart of the cia. thousands of documents, millions of lines of code — and, if it is all genuine, it shows the extraordinary array of hacking and spying tools available to the cia. some of that won't be a surprise. some of it's colourful — the ability to infect a samsung tv and turn it into a microphone that records conversations, for example. the british apparently helped with that one, by the way. the cia won't confirm the authenticity of any of it, but there are two big questions. is it reasonable for the cia to have these abilities? wikileaks suggests it's overreach. but the second is, can't the cia guard any of its own secrets? if it is incapable of doing so, should it harbour software that could allow massive abuse by those
with malign intent? well here's david grossman. the documents are purportedly from the cia's centre for cyber intelligence. 7918 documents with 915 attachments. wikileaks say it is only part of what it intends to publish. the rise of connected devices has promised intelligence agencies like the cia a new golden age of spycraft, where every home is filled with all sorts of objects that can be enlisted to gather data against their owners. what wikileaks have got details of is how the cia are going about doing this and the very computer code they are using. this seems to be an incredibly damaging leak in terms of the tactics, procedures and tools that were used by the cia to conduct legitimate foreign intelligence. in other words, it has made my country and my country's friends less safe.
for example, the wikileaks document suggests that the cia have bypassed the encryption on android mobile phone messaging apps like whatsapp, telegram, and signal, and collect audio and messaging traffic before it is encrypted. these are wraps which many people used to relay sensitive information because they believe they are impenetrable. one technique, code—named weeping angel, can turn a samsung smart tv in a target's living room can turn it into a live microphone. this was apparently developed with the help of the uk's gchq. wikileaks say they have got hold of millions of lines of computer code, the cia's toolbox of tricks and hacks. but, they say, they won't be releasing what they call these armed cyber weapons until a consensus emerges on how they can be dealt with. how they can be
a handled and disarmed. it will add to the damage done to western intelligence agencies by chelsea manning and edward snowden. we don't know how this information got out. one former director believes that one of the big dangers to secrecy is cultural. in order to do this kind of stuff, we have to recruit from a certain demographic, and i don't mean tojudge them, there is a group of millennials and they simply have different understandings of the words "loyalty" and "secrecy" and "tra nsparency", than certainly my generation did. and so we bring these folks into the agency, good americans i can only assume, but again, culturally, they have different instincts than the people who made the decision to hire them. what has supposedly been leaked suggests no limit to the cia's ambition, like hacking self—driving cars as a future weapon for assassinations.
what is likely to be most damaging is that the us intelligence agencies as yet can't be sure how many of their secrets have been breached. david grossman. well, our diplomatic editor, mark urban, is with me. this leaking is a big issue, mark. and how and why — and how many people have access to all of this staff? well, the agencies are caught in this terrible place where they've had to create huge surveillance programmes, let's face it, that's what we're talking about, in power in awful lot of people to share that information because of the lessons of 9/11 and other systemic failures, stove—piping, they want to get across all of that. 800,000 plus people are cleared to top—secret and higher level—code the us.
if even a tiny proportion of those or ideological or opposed, greedy, they want to sell the stuff, all working for another power, damage can be done. it is getting harder for intelligence agencies generally to a tribute or track where different malware and tools are coming from. why take away from my initial read of this, the most interesting stuff was this tom burridge group, a group in the cia that harvest other states‘s cyber tactics to use by the cia in deniable attacks. add to that that we now know that many of these cyber attack tools, with if you like, an american forensic signature, are in the hands of wikileaks and who knows who else, and the wilderness of mirrors about attributing cyber attacks, who the hell has done this? we saw this with the democrats in this last summer, it becomes harder and harder to work out. thanks mark. bruce schneier is a security technologist and harvard fellow. i spoke to him earlier, and i asked him if this was a disaster for the cia. i mean, certainly whenever classified documents are released by an intelligence agency,
it is a disaster. these are particularly sensitive, they are hacking tools, they are techniques the cia uses. and if i was inside the cia, i would call this a disaster as well. what do you think is going on here? we have this leak, it seems to be one thing after the other at the moment. what's happened to the culture of secrecy that you would expect in an intelligence agency? it's not the culture of secrecy, it's the culture of computing. these documents are on computers, they are on networks, which means they are vulnerable. they are vulnerable for outsiders hacking, they are vulnerable for insiders taking them and leaving. and we see this against the cia, the nsa, a panamanian law firm, the democratic national committee, climate change researchers, again and again and again — individuals, organisations and nation states are hacking these documents, and in many cases, making these public. michael hayden, former director of the cia, told the bbc earlier that he thought there may be something
about a kind of a culture of the people who you need to recruit to be kind of working the computers and devising all these tools in the first place, that perhaps theyjust have a different view of their life and their career that say the old spooks did say a generation ago. you know, maybe that is generalising from one example, from edward snowden, maybe from two, from chelsea manning. this is probably an outsider, not an insider, like the nsa equation group documents were hacked by the shadow brokers. you know, it's really hard to generalise. there are so few examples. the only thing we know is that these documents are more vulnerable because there are on networks, which means that individuals can do more damage. now, look, how dangerous is it that a lot of these cia tools are now out
in the hands of other people? how much damage can those other people do if those tools leak through? well, the tools are leaked. and near as we can tell, they've leaked for a while. wikileaks said that they have been passed around for a while. so they've already done damage. now we can start getting security, now that we know what the attacks are, we can fix these systems and be less vulnerable. and that's really the way to think. i mean, yes, it's bad that these attacks are out there, but they were out there anywhere. the cia knew that it was most likely that other countries did as well. so getting them in the hands of the public so they can be fixed is really a measure of making things better. bruce schneier, thank you for talking to me. and bruce also told me he always puts something over the cameras on his various devices to make sure they are not him. not because of the russians or the chinese, but because of teenage hackers sometimes having fun filming things. and glenn greenwald is the journalist that campaigns on these national security issues. hejoins me from rio. good evening. have you seen anything in these leaks that make you think
the cia was doing anything wrong? one, i think, very significant revelation, is that the cia actively encourages and at times even pays various companies and organisations to preserve vulnerabilities that there are able to exploit in a lot of these software programmes. so that means not only they can go through these back doors that they make sure exist, but so can hackers, or other nations. the cia and nsa making the internet more unsafe for everybody. i think that is very disturbing. —— more on so maybe they should tell the googles and the apples where the vulnerabilities are rather fun exploit them. have you seen any evidence that listening in on televisions or making
driverless cars crash, have you seen any evidence that these have been applied to good people, ordinary people, as opposed to what president trump would call the " bad hombres". do you think they have been misusing these tools? one of the problems with having a massive surveillance state, intelligence community, that operates almost entirely in the dark is that we know very little about what they actually do. there is very little accountability or oversight, which is why when we did this reporting, even people on the intelligence committee said, we didn't even know that these were taking place. so based on the first sort of batch of documents that wikileaks have released, we know the cia have extraordinary abilities that they are exploiting. we don't know against who they are using it, but the history of the cia is one filled with abuse, and we ought to know more about why they are using it. but let's be honest: have you really seen any thing that surprises you in terms of a skill or a talent or a tool that they have?
in a lot of ways, this is just what you would expect a really top—class spying agency to be doing, isn't it? i think some of the methods that they use, and the extent of control they are able to obtain over people's android phones, the progress that they have made into people's iphones, has actually surprised people who work in the security field. it's not shocking that the cia is trying to do it, although i don't think a lot of people knew that the cia has such a vast surveillance apparatus. they assumed that the nsa was really the agency that uses billions of dollars, so that it is suprising. it is not shocking the cia is trying, but it
can do clever stuff to spy on people from abroad, preferably, who are doing or mean us harm, or do we not want intelligence agencies to do that? and i — i mean we have come back to this, and i have spoken to you about it before. in the end, if you are going to have intelligence agencies, you have to let them get on with the job and you can't expect them to stand by telling you what they are doing because it isn't going to work if they do that. yeah, i mean, ithink, you know, there is an absolutist way to look at things, which is very simplified. either they get full secrecy or they have none. and then there's a more sophisticated way to look at it, which we as journalists ought to be adopting, which is, yes, you need some degree of secrecy, but in a democracy, secrecy is extremely corrosive and dangerous. and for agencies that we have allowed to operate almost entirely in the dark, as journalists, our objective ought to be to report on what they are doing and cheer
for when there is transparency. that the government is trying to protect secrecy. as journalists we ought to be devoted to telling the public what these people are doing. some people say wikileaks have been strangely related to trump in these kind of ways. do you think there's anything strange about the timing of this, another difficult week for president trump, and this whole fuss about president obama, and did he tap him. is this a distraction? i mean, it is funny because we always like to look at russian media and the arab world and mock them for conspiracies and yet we in the west sure do love our conspiracies. there was a weird timing issues with wikileaks, intended to distract... there is always important news going on. wikileaks published this material not in a particularly sensitive week.
i can assure you it takes some time to process this material and unless we have evidence that wikileaks manipulated the timing i do not think we should be assuming that that took place. i do not know of any evidence that says anything like that happened. theresa may suffered the embarrassment of defeat today. the lords voted with a majority ofjust under 100 to insist parliament has the final "meaningful vote" on the deal she gets on brexit. the pm will whip her mps to try and overturn this defeat when the bill comes back to the commons — probably next week. now theresa may is hailed as the most unassailable prime minister we've had for years, a weak opposition, a united party. but, think a little on it, and you remember she has only a small majority in the commons — so she's vulnerable on all sorts of thorny issues such as brexit, grammar schools and us taking in refugees. that's why some colleagues — including william hague
in his telegraph column today — have said she should call a general election to strengthen her position. nick watt is here. how popular is that opinion amongst conservatives? downing street gave the william hague idea short shrift but i'm told there's something of a debate going on involving members of the cabinet, as to whether an early election would be a good idea. as i said, there are a whole series of issues that the prime minister may be vulnerable on with such a small majority. these ministers are saying over the next two years you may be able to mountan next two years you may be able to mount an argument that it is in the national interest to hold an election before the due date in 2020. the moment they are identified is when the government seeks to
introduce the great repeal bill. this is the legislation that would annul the legislation underpinning oui’ annul the legislation underpinning our membership of the eu and it will put all that eu legislation into uk law and then the uk will be able to decide which bits of that legislation it wants to keep. i'm told his ministers have identified a couple of danger points with that legislation. number one is when it is in the house of lords, we have seen the house of lords this week bearing their teeth and there was a feeling in government circles that if the commons could overturn those amendments bumble laud them —— from the lords, then the lords would throw in the towel and not want to be accused of thwarting the will of the people on brexit. there will be no such qualms on the great repeal bill, they think, and the second danger identified by ministers is that the scottish parliament may say that under the original devolution settlement that great repeal bill would need their consent. asi
as i said, perhaps the prime minister najib you vulnerable on such a small majority. here's chris cook. a busy college green here in westminster is a sign that something is about to happen in parliament. tomorrow is budget day, which is a day when the government usually looks at its most imperious. the whole structure of the day really favours the people in power. it also comes as the conservative party's racking up enormous poll leads, consistently in double digits over the labour party. but might that mean that we are overstating just how strong theresa may's position really is? critically, take a look at the lords where the government does not have a majority. as of tonight, theresa may has lost 2a votes in the upper house. well, we look at issues where we can make a difference and perhaps persuade the house of commons and the government to think again. things like the housing bill, we've asked the government to think again on that. on trade union legislation, on education. and indeed some of
the aspects of brexit. indeed, just this evening, the lords have defeated the government again on brexit. they've passed an amendment demanding what they call "a meaningful vote" by parliament on the terms of brexit at the end of the negotiation. one of two lords amendments on the brexit bill. everyone in this house knows that we now face the most momentous peace time decision of our time. and this amendment as the noble lord has so clearly set out, secures in law the government's commitment, already made to another place, to ensure that parliament is the ultimate custodian of our national sovereignty. i am in a minority in this house because i support the views of the majority of people in this country. this house is absolutely full of people who still haven't come to terms with the results of the referendum. so what now? well, the effect of these votes is to reopen the legislation
in the commons. and so potentially re—empower rebel tory backbenchers to negotiate new concessions from theresa may. if we take the article 50 bill, there were small numbers of conservative rebels on some key issues when the bill went through the commons. notably on the rights of eu citizens to remain in the uk and on the parliamentary vote at the end of the process. it's no coincidence that those are the issues that the lords has taken up very strongly and is seeking to throw back to the commons to ask the commons to think again. and what it is doing really there is facilitating those negotiations between her and her backbenchers. if the backbenchers are satisfied, she will get her way. she may need to offer them more assurances in order to get the bill through. theresa may will ask mps to overturn the peers‘ amendments. and it is plausible she might not win both of those votes. her majority is currentlyjust 17. and that's why the lords can
trouble the government so much. they complain, oh, we haven't got the majority, well, this is the first conservative government never to have had an automatic majority in the house of lords. but no labour government ever had a majority in the house of lords, you win your case, you persuade, you articulate, you make that case. and that is what the government needs to understand and needs to do. but some tories want a quick election. they say it could mean a bigger commons majority. and peers don't pick fights over items once they've been put on a manifesto. but at least for now, the government is grinding on. and, once the brexit negotiation starts, a voluntary election will become harder to call. chris cook there. well, as you heard, one test of the prime minister's strength comes next week, when remainer mps have to decide whether to support her on the brexit bill — or to side with the lords, who've amended it. the issue is whether parliament should get a meaningful vote on any brexit deal when it is agreed. let's focus on that now.
i'm joined by gina miller, who famously brought the legal case for parliament to have a vote on article 50. she is in brussels. and theresa villiers is here — former northern ireland secretary and leading brexiteer. theresa villiers, as we were watching that lord heseltine has been sacked as a government adviser because he rebelled on the bill. is that showing a kind of sensitivity to all this, a bit of brittleness question what michael heseltine was a long serving member of the conservative party but he's very much out line with the majority feeling within the conservative party and indeed within the country. he's not even a member of the government, just an adviser. but you have two kind of show how tough the discipline is going to be? i do not know the circumstances but i think it was always inevitable when he was rebelling on such a crucially important issue. gina miller, the idea of a vote at the end of the process, is it the case that you would like parliament to have the option
if they do not like the deal theresa may comes back with, is it the case you would like them to have the option to say let's just take in the eu or have a referendum on staying in rather than going through with brexit? it's not about what i want, and it's not at the end of the process, it's in 18 months. we're not talking about the great repeal act, it's in 18 months when mrs may comes back with that negotiated package. and it's only right that parliament should be involved in that process, i mean that's what my case was about and what all the leavers brexiteers talked about, parliamentary sovereignty and parliament having the right to vote and debate. and that's what's so great about the house of lords, they showed it could be done as a level that is civilised and grown up and you could respect the point of view of other people. are you thinking another legal case? if theresa may says, i'm not interested and i'm
going to the house of lords, are you thinking another legal case on this would be due? if you go back to the judgment in my case that the supreme court, it said that only parliament could take away or diminish people's rights. in 18 months we will not know what rights have been taken away because we do not have a crystal ball, we do not know what the package will be. if you look at the judgment there is some thinking that if mrs may bypasses the parliament and doesn't deliver on her promise, if this amendment doesn't get in, there could be a case for us to take back to parliament, sorry, to the court and say could she act on her own without parliament. theresa villiers, that's not, i suspect, what you want to hear? because that would mean a legal argument right at the climax of article 50 negotiations. that is one of the real anxieties about these amendments. any amendment to what is a simple bill makes it potentially disusable and drag it into the courts. i believe that particularly
the amendment passed today is a recipe for stalemate and disruption. i'm sure gina miller is entirely sincere in what she's doing but i think many people who backed this amendment today in the house of lords really in their heart of hearts are trying to frustrate the process. they have given themselves the power to veto a deal, to veto without a deal, essentially what they want is to keep us in and this respect the vote. there is a bit of a puzzle, as they said they want to be able to veto a non—deal and a deal. you could end upjust in a twilight zone. actually the house of lords cannot do a veto, they can scrutinise and give their opinion but they cannot actually veto something. but if we get back to... i don't understand why there's so much of this argument about holding up brexit, because it is the prime minister and
the government holding up brexit. just putting these one is morally right and the other is common sense to have a parliamentary safety net. put both in and stop the ping—pong between the houses, trigger article 50 and get on with complex negotiations. it's government itself that's holding up this process. for example, with eu nationals, i entirely sympathise with the sentiment of the amendment, but this is not the vehicle to deal with this question. it has to be dealt with bilaterally as part of negotiations. is this because it makes the end of the process unmanageable, if the executive doesn't have the power to say this is the deal or we walk out, which is effectively what theresa may wants to be able to do this right with the amendment this evening a key defect is that it seeks to prevent the prime minister from deciding the deal on the table is not good enough and i will go back to parliament or recommend leaving without a deal. so not being able to walk away from negotiations means that europe has you over a barrel.
i'm afraid we need to leave it there. that is just the nub of the argument that has been raging on. thank you both. well, austerity may have been pushed out of the headlines lately, mostly perhaps by brexit, but anyone working in a local authority will tell you that cuts to council budgets are having a real impact. so, to help get us all in the mood for tomorrow's budget, we embedded katie razzall with cumbria county council, run by labour in coalition with the lib dems, one of those hoping for a sliver of help from the chancellor. we can't go on like this. we are in uncharted territory, really, for local government. sparsely populated, flood—prone cumbria. vast and beautiful. a county where cuts now threaten real upset, say council leaders. i think local government is experiencing an existential crisis.
in cumbria, what we're looking at really is what i would call the perfect storm. stuart young is the leader of cumbria county council. ijoined him this morning at the start of his day. a labour politician at the helm as the eighth year of austerity begins to bite. we have already had to make £198 million worth of savings since 2010. if there is anything that keeps me awake at night, it is, how are we going to find the rest of those savings? whilst protecting services as much as we possibly can. the council must cut another £52 million in the next three years. an accountant by trade, for mr young, the numbers no longer add up. we will go this way, i think, katie. he agreed to allow newsnight to accompany him to work where the labour group run the county council in a coalition with the liberal democrats.
adult social care is now the largest part of our budget. i mean, obviously, like everywhere else, people are living longer. the problems aren't just in social care. and the council has already made cuts across the board, including axing 1800 employees. cumbria has a new chief executive. in the job for less than a week. this is our first proper meeting, i guess. the government wants local authorities to become self—sufficient. at the moment, it plans to stop its funding grant to councils entirely by 2020. i think officers are really keen to see what emerges tomorrow from the chancellor. it is meeting after meeting for the leader. this with the counsellor in charge of adult social care, which cost the authority about £200 million every year. i think it is biting everyday now when a new
referral comes through to a social worker. can king providing a good service to people who need adult social care, without. .. service to people who need adult social care, without... with less money? i think the answer to that has to be no. when you've got demand growing, year on year, there has to bea limit growing, year on year, there has to be a limit on how much you can take out without it being clearly felt by the recipients of that service. you can tell someone tall has been here, joyce! i can hardly reach it! they're all taller than you, pet! i know! this is what's at stake, they say. joyce lee has multiple sclerosis. she is only able to stay in her own home with the help of a team of drop—in carers. i can get to the cooker, but i can't reach it. you know. so they do my meals, so i find it about right four times a day.
what does it mean to you to have this care? how important is it? very, very important. i would probably have to go into permanent care otherwise. i think it's terrible that the cutting is happening. my mum and dad, what if they don't get care, i can't imagine no one getting the standard of care that we give to our clients. joyce, are you ok if i go through your care plan and just review the care plan? heather runs one of the companies contracted by the council to offer care. you have male and female carers, and you're happy with all of them? yes. if you think about it, they haven't got anything i want, and i haven't got anything they want any more! 0k! the council here is putting up council tax, in part to raise money for social care. but in these rural counties, it's more expensive to provide. where will the axe fall?
the council is keeping its cards close to its chest ahead of elections in may. but not everyone agrees crisis point is upon them. when we were in control, we saved £55 million in cumbria and it was relatively easy. there was a lot of fat there to be cut. so it was doable. and this administration, this current administration has wasted millions upon millions of pounds worth of taxpayers' money. so there's still money out there to be found, but it is becoming more difficult. i think as we look forward to the next three years and possibly beyond, i think many of us are wondering really where this is all going to end. i think local government is experiencing an existential crisis. and it is difficult to see how some of the services are going to survive at all in the face of the ongoing cuts. we are briefly going to go back to the breaking news is that we
mentioned earlier that michael heseltine has been sacked asa government adviser after rebelling on the brexit vote. why did they do it, nick? the man who brought down britain's first woman prime minister has just been sacked by britain's second woman prime minister! he had fivejobs, apparently. the reason the are being so hard—core is that they are absolutely determined that this bill, which michael has sought to amend, must emerge completely clean. if there were any weaknesses to be exploited by our negotiating partners, and we can turn to the son of an old ally of michael heseltine was mike, robin walker, the son of the peter walker, he is saying that if as the lords did tonight you will allow parliament to have the right to veto the bill, that would create all sorts of
problems that would be exploited by michel barnier. nick, thank you very much. time for viewsnight now. and tonight, we have the young dutch writer, rutger bregman, to offer us an optimistic take on the state of humankind. he's a man with a lot of ideas — the writer of a book called rutger bregman, author of utopia for realists. the book reflects his optimistic take — but is a kind of manifesto for radical upheaval. it suggests a much shorter working week, and a basic income — paid to everyone, even if they do nothing. that's the utopia bit, less clear on the realism. rutger is with me. is it? well, i suppose on the basic income, a lot of people have tried to make it work and do the maths on it. you have to leave it so low that you leave a lot of people very poor, or so high that you can't afford it. i don't think so. basic income is the least radical of the ideas in my book.
we have a lot of evidence from the 70s, in canada they did an experiment forfour years, they found that people got healthier, and didn't quit theirjobs. people have a lot of objections. it was a town near winnipeg. it was subsidised from the outside, that one. it wasn't self financing. the government paid for the basic income. as soon as you have a system where there isn't an outsider, you know, a martian to come in and pay for it all, it is very different, isn't it? i don't think so. if you look at poverty, for example. it is hugely expensive, in terms of higher health care spending, crime, high dropout rates. a study in the us found that it costs about $500 billion, just child poverty, and it will cost us billions to eradicate poverty completely. it is easier to get rid of it and keep on combating it.
you are giving me a subsidy but i don't need one. but you are paying for it, don't worry! then you have very high taxes, and people like me might say, why am i giving this money and paying an 80% tax rate? that is why nobody has ever done it. people have really looked at it and they have come very close. many people see this as a leftist idea. milton friedman, the neoliberal economist, was in favour of this. the right—wing government in finland is experimenting with it right now. a conservative senator in canada is proposing another experiment. another experiment is going on in kenya right now. especially after 2016, we need new ideas. that everybody agrees with. we have a lot of evidence from experiments that it is effective, efficient, and we use the money very well. health care costs go down. slightly narrower experiments that don't necessarily pay for themselves. you are proposing a 15—hour week as well. that makes it doubly hard to pay for my basic income, because we are all going to be
working half as much. i think we need to completely redefine what work actually is. so nowadays, according to a recent poll, as much as 37% of british workers think that they have a job but doesn't need to exist. it is a waste of time, money and energy. what is going on here that you know, a 28—year—old dutch person knows that these jobs are not needed. it is not me saying that. somebody is saying, i'm going to employ these people because it is going to make me or my company money or my country rich. exactly. why do you think we have a huge financial sector? it's not because they create any wealth. we have so much energy and talent being wasted right now. what are the bankers going to do? and what is the process where you are
going to work out what they are doing? so you don't want to be banking. what is the mechanism, is its central planning or a market? if it is a market, they will go straight back into banking. these ideas go through the political dividing line between the left and the right. the left doesn't trust people to make their own choices, and the right things that people have to be forced into work or something else. i think people know perfectly well what to do with their lives. we are not going to live in a big giant commune. what is the bankers going to do, and what is the process going to tell him what to do? it is interesting, you get the stories in magazines, you have got a very rich guy who might decide to quit his job and do what he really wants to. we see it as coming he is a hero coming he's going to do what he really wants to do. what i'm proposing is in
a society where that's just completely natural, where we are all trying to contribute in our own way and do what we actually want to do. and that is why it is called utopia for realists. thank you very much. that's all we have time for. i'm back tomorrow, which is of course budget day. until then, goodnight. hello good evening. there were some spring sunshine for many of us today. the sunny spot was in east yorkshire, but this weather watcher caught this pleasant picture from west yorkshire. we are seeing changes, right now, coming in from off the atlantic. this is where our weather is coming from now. and this set of weather fronts is to buy low pressure running between iceland and scotland. that is bringing rain across the country. we also it going to introduce me there. later in the week, this mother and will come from a long way south. temperatures will be above average for this time of year. it was chilly enough in scotla nd year. it was chilly enough in scotland to give us some snow over the mountains, otherwise it is rain. that rate is moving quickly eastwards, away from scotland. showers following on. turning dry in
northern ireland and eventually england. it stumbles on studies of the bed, and will hang around, not just overnight, but into wednesday, as well. after the rain, some such an early on wednesday in scotland. some showers in the north—west. these could be perky. so again in the mountains. gales in the north of the mountains. gales in the north of the country. in northern ireland, so jumba the morning, and after the rain, we should see the search and developing there. elsewhere, more a nyway of developing there. elsewhere, more anyway of and a bit of rain and drizzle on the way. mind out there, but so more persistent rain coming in to the south england in south—west wales. the midlands for a while, it and south england, they have a chance of more rain on wednesday. it struggles to clear away. it should improve later in wales and the midlands, but is north wales, northern ireland, northern england that will see some sunshine. it will be windier in scotland, and feel colder. as temperatures in the south—east, where we have all that
cloud around and a chance of some rain. and there may be some or rain at domain into the evening across south wales and england before it sinks waited the english channel. some showers falloon across scotland. those could be sharp to begin with on thursday. but then there ease away. in most places, it will be a dry day. some sunshine. cut across the countries and the threat of rain coming from the english channel. that will push its way northwards on friday. not a grey deal of rain, but a lot of cloud. we are drawing in southerly winds, so we have me there. whether right on the scene on saturday. turning a little more rain. they me our saturday, and that is an showers and sunshine to follow for the second half of the weekend, and then slowly be temperatures will start to ebb away with it. more details, of course, online. —— the temperatures. hello, everyone. i'm rico hizon. the
top stories: the un calls for calm asa top stories: the un calls for calm as a diplomatic row escalates between malaysia and north korea. both sides have banned each other‘s citizens from leaving their countries. wikileaks countries. wikilea ks publishes thousands countries. wikileaks publishes thousands of documents, it says, containing details of a crow to hacking techniques. welcome. amal clooney tells the bbc about taking her legal battle on behalf of the persecuted yazidi people to the un. trying to destroy them as a group and we are allowing it to happen. and poachers kill a rhino for its horn